Regarding rectangular AoE Spells still stacking.

[zDark Shadowz]

While the circular AoE spells like Mind Fog, Stonehold, Cloud of Bewilderment, Grease etc no longer stack if they collide, rectangular AoE spells like Wall of Fire are still stackable into one spot. (probably Blade Barrier & Wall of Perilous Flame too)

Will that be fixed in future, or is that intended?

[malthuul]

Don't touch my flame walls 😭

[Anarcoplayba]

While the circular AoE spells like Mind Fog, Stonehold, Cloud of Bewilderment, Grease etc no longer stack if they collide, rectangular AoE spells like Wall of Fire are still stackable into one spot. (probably Blade Barrier & Wall of Perilous Flame too)

Will that be fixed in future, or is that intended?

In the original post it was mentioned that they would keep those spells like that stacking, but unser future evaluation.

[Bizarro]

Now, this is my take. But I don't think that's worth it not making them stack since one could still put a lot of them one after another and still have the mobs run through them even if they aren't on the exact same spot. It wouldn't really make a difference in most scenarios.

[Anarcoplayba]

Now, this is my take. But I don't think that's worth it not making them stack since one could still put a lot of them one after another and still have the mobs run through them even if they aren't on the exact same spot. It wouldn't really make a difference in most scenarios.

Personally, I don't think it is a serious issue as is the aoe effects.

[bloodless]

I would rather they didn't stack on the same spot. Line them up side by side, sure, but having a warlock plop down ten walls of fire on the same square is a little silly, and can be potentially abused in PvP situations as it isn't obvious at a glance that stacking has occurred unless you were there to see it being done.

[Tyrannical Andy]

I would rather they didn't stack on the same spot. Line them up side by side, sure, but having a warlock plop down ten walls of fire on the same square is a little silly, and can be potentially abused in PvP situations as it isn't obvious at a glance that stacking has occurred unless you were there to see it being done.

Exactly how I feel about it. Someone might think its just one WoF and opt to run through and take the damage, to then find they're scorched beyond recognition.

[Water]

I would rather they didn't stack on the same spot. Line them up side by side, sure, but having a warlock plop down ten walls of fire on the same square is a little silly, and can be potentially abused in PvP situations as it isn't obvious at a glance that stacking has occurred unless you were there to see it being done.

Twenty, if you use extend, also you can kill any enemy on the server this way, it is hillarious to do.

[Maiyannah]

I would rather they didn't stack on the same spot. Line them up side by side, sure, but having a warlock plop down ten walls of fire on the same square is a little silly, and can be potentially abused in PvP situations as it isn't obvious at a glance that stacking has occurred unless you were there to see it being done.

At this point its about the one thing Warlock has going for it, so if they change that, the class itself needs reexamined; this is likely why they had said they wouldn't be touching it.

Exactly how I feel about it. Someone might think its just one WoF and opt to run through and take the damage, to then find they're scorched beyond recognition.

I don't know what one would expect to become running into a wall of fire if not "scorched"

[Tyrannical Andy]

There's a difference between 80 damage and 800 from something that does not have much visual difference

[Anarcoplayba]

There's a difference between 80 damage and 800 from something that does not have much visual difference

It is kinda meta-ey.

"Oh, a wall of fire, it deals 1d6 per level, so, considering the spells my opponent used, it must give me at most 80 damage", said Grokk, the barbarian, before charging.

[Tyrannical Andy]

Play around wizards for long enough and you can learn the potency of all kinds of spells IC as you recover from your wounds.

[Anarcoplayba]

Play around wizards for long enough and you can learn the potency of all kinds of spells IC as you recover from your wounds.

And then, all of a sudden, your barbarian take multiple walls, or an empowered, or a maximized, or a wall from a warfare and thinks "yikes, that is not what I was expecting" and magic becomes a surprise for mundane classes, as it always should have been.

This knowledge you learn from playing around wizzies is metagame, for it is ooc, unless you spent your skill points in spellcraft.

[Tyrannical Andy]

I don't think any meta or OOC info can be drawn from looking at the spell visual in game (WYSIWYG), and seeing the same thing over and over again and not have some idea of what it is and does. Else anyone without spellcraft on this server is considered a lobotomite.

To note, at no point have I said anything about knowing the dice damage of X spells or even their name in game. I don't even know the tooltip damage of WoF anyway, I just know t he fire line hurts. And that's all you need IC. Recognise that the spell that looks like a line of fire hurts like hell. But when the same looking line of fire hits like 20 hells, that's beyond considering any sort of metamagic to justify it.

[Maiyannah]

It shouldn't be able to, you are correct.
Yet the complaint you make is directly derived from meta information.

And then, all of a sudden, your barbarian take multiple walls, or an empowered, or a maximized, or a wall from a warfare and thinks "yikes, that is not what I was expecting" and magic becomes a surprise for mundane classes, as it always should have been

This is the correct take.  "They can surprise me" is not a valid argument that the class is unbalanced; in fact, often the opposite is true.

[Anarcoplayba]

I don't think any meta or OOC info can be drawn from looking at the spell visual in game (WYSIWYG), and seeing the same thing over and over again and not have some idea of what it is. Else anyone without spellcraft on this server is considered a lobotomite.

Different things: wysiwyg means that what you see in the prompt is what your PC sees. It doesn't mean that what he sees is what is. We're it true, each bulls (normal, extended, empowered and maximized) would have different vfx.

What you see does not bind reality (the concept of ilusion is exctly that) many different things may look similar (ram's might and bulls have the same vfx, for instance)

[bloodless]

It's not the only thing a warlock can do, and the strategy will be just as viable in PvE if you had to line up your walls next to each other, something made trivially easier by the addition of spells showing you their exact boundaries when cast now. There's no real reason to keep it as is given that the fog spells were changed over balance considerations yet we allow this which allows up to 20 stacks of otherwise infinite casts. To note, it would also affect other exploit prone spells such as Blade Barrier, which you can get scrolls of and go ham with. These may be niche cases but the verdict on wall spells after the fog change was "we're evaluating", not "we're not changing". This is my argument for their change. Consistency and the squashing of a few niche PvP related exploits.

[Anarcoplayba]

It's not the only thing a warlock can do, and the strategy will be just as viable in PvE if you had to line up your walls next to each other, something made trivially easier by the addition of spells showing you their exact boundaries when cast now. There's no real reason to keep it as is given that the fog spells were changed over balance considerations yet we allow this which allows up to 20 stacks of otherwise infinite casts. To note, it would affect other exploit prone spells such as Blade Barrier, which you can get scrolls of and go ham with.

Let's be honest: there are things that are possible in the general sense and the things that are effective. RP aside, the fact that a warlock CAN do a certain array of things, doesn't mean everything that he can do makes a viable build. We all know that from the general invocations list, a few invocations are taken and most of them are regarded as useless. I'd like to see why would someone grab "swiming in the styx" over, like, anything else.

The spell has a short duration, you are limited to 20 walls (if you grab extended) and go with the (tedious) task of doing that. Taking out the stacking would not allow it to be possible (for the distance in which you can cast is limited).

Saying "it would change nothing" is simply not true. The discussion should be taken clearly and expliciting saying that warlock deserves a big nerf in one of its most powerful spells that even then is not enough to "kill the server": I have a lvl 20 warlock in the action server and a full stack of walls do not kill the thralls in the aboleth and a whole lot of other enemies.

[bloodless]

My question is why does the warlock need to have 20 walls stacked up to be considered viable or effective? That is the strategy that allows you to kill literally anything that isn't fire immune on the server. I've watched a warlock go through the process to then solo the Aboleth doing this in no time flat. Sure, it's not a one shot but you can afford the time to play around it in combination with darkness and enervating shadows. Is this a good thing for anyone involved?

[Tyrannical Andy]

Maybe my point didn't come across as intended, however, I strongly disagree with any notion of defending this way of spell stacking as being derived from meta info. As pointed out by Bloodless earlier. Unless you are present to watch the spells being cast, it is not visually clear for some of the spells, at least. The defence to me is really absurd. I'm thinking from a PvP standpoint which is where this would mainly cause issues. There isn't a scenario where a complaint isn't raised when somebody's PC gets immediately badly impaired because they walked into a spell not knowing that there was an additional 19 of the same spell hidden within it. Probably less than half that amount from a warmage.

And yes, if a warlock requires this to be "viable" is a thing, then warlock needs looking at, or the thought of needing to be able to solo everything as a caster needs to be quashed.

[Maiyannah]

Maybe my point didn't come across as intended, however, I strongly disagree with any notion of defending this way of spell stacking as being derived from meta info. As pointed out by Bloodless earlier. Unless you are present to watch the spells being cast, it is not visually clear for some of the spells, at least.

There is an entire school of spells of which the intended point is to be NOT what you see is what you get, so the argument that spells should be so falls flat at the first hurdle and can be considered moot.

There isn't a scenario where a complaint isn't raised when somebody's PC gets immediately badly impaired because they walked into a spell not knowing that there was an additional 19 of the same spell hidden within it.

You can't know this because if someone doesn't raise a complaint then you hear nothing, so that seems at best a shallow argument.

I've watched a warlock go through the process to then solo the Aboleth doing this in no time flat. Sure, it's not a one shot but you can afford the time to play around it in combination with darkness and enervating shadows. Is this a good thing for anyone involved?

If you judge things based on what the top 1% of the server achieves then you will achieve many things and none of them could be described as "balance" nor as "a good thing for anyone involved."

[Tyrannical Andy]

There is an entire school of spells of which the intended point is to be NOT what you see is what you get, so the argument that spells should be so falls flat at the first hurdle and can be considered moot.

We're talking mainly about EVOCATION here. Not Illusion. Actually, I don't think there are any illusion spells that are rectangular AoE's

[zDark Shadowz]

I was more hoping for a developer to respond before the NCE hits.

Spoiler: show

 I own a warmage so I have the Walls of Fire being edged up in rows, which is great for demolishing greater dust devils & stuff (logged in after 2 months inactivity and got from the start of level 8->9 in an hour, straight to blind drive) but if I wanted to start a warlock the below would be fun.

Twenty, if you use extend, also you can kill any enemy on the server this way, it is hillarious to do.

_{(If you are hasted while extended stacking this it should get to 39-40 right? Or does the 10 round cap apply to extend)}

NCE is the best time to power level new characters, so just confirming the unresistable 8.5 to 13.5 untyped damage per wall stacking is never going to be removed before I commit to a warlock character or get to that level would be great.

[Merry Munchkin]

I think the rules regarding stacking ANYTHING should be consistent.  Rogues can't stack traps (square AOE) for the same reason people are objecting to stacking wall spells.

[Abear]

I would rather they didn't stack on the same spot. Line them up side by side, sure, but having a warlock plop down ten walls of fire on the same square is a little silly, and can be potentially abused in PvP situations as it isn't obvious at a glance that stacking has occurred unless you were there to see it being done.

Agreed. AOE stacking doesn't make any sense and only contributes to the continual cheesing of dungeons at best.